Example citation format: Dasgupta, P. (2007). Nature and the economy. Journal of Applied Ecology 44, 475–487.
1. Overview of environmental economics
a. Don Fullerton and Robert Stavins, “How Economists See the Environment,” Nature, 395:6 701 (1998).
(A
key reading in only 2 pages.)
Michael Harris. 1996. “For the Student: Environmental Economics.” Australian Economic Review, 29(4),
449-465. (Environmental economics in a 16 page nutshell.)
c. Robert N. Stavins. “Environmental Economics.” Resources for the Future discussion paper 04-54,
prepared in 2004 for The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition, Ed. Lawrence Blume and
Steven Durlauf. London: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd, 2008. (EE for the New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, an environmental
b.
economics textbook boiled down to about 14 pages.)
d. David Pearce. 2002. “An intellectual history of environmental economics”, Annual Review of Energy and
the Environment 27, pp. 57–81.
e. Revesz, R. L. and R. N. Stavins (2007). Environmental law. In: Mitchell Polinsky A, Shavell S (eds)
Handbook of law and economics. Elsevier Science, Amesterdam, pp 499-589.
f. Textbooks
i. N. Keohane and S. Olmstead. Markets and the Environment, Island Press, Washington, D.C.,
2007.
ii. Hackett, D. C. (2011) Environmental and Natural Resource Economics. Theory, Policy and the
Sustainable Society, 4th ed., M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, New York, London.
iii. Kolstad, C.D. (2000) Environmental Economics, Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford.
g. Mäler, Karl-Göran and Jeffrey R. Vincent, eds. (2003-2005). Handbook of Environmental Economics, Vols
1-3. Elsevier.
2. Ethics & ERE (see also “CBA: Criticism, ethics and the political process” below)
a. Kneese, A., and W. Schulze (1985), ‘Ethics and Environmental Economics’, in A. V. Kneese and J.
Sweeney, eds., Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, Vol. 1, New York: Elsevier Science
Publishers. {Interesting discussion.}
b. Hackett (2006). Chapter 2: “Value Systems and Economic Systems” pp. 21-40.
c. Natural science literature
i. Davis et al. (2011). Don't judge species on their origins. Nature 474(7350), 153—154. (Argues that
conservationists should assess organisms on environmental impact rather than on whether they are natives.)
d. Sandel, M. (2009). Justice: What’s the right thing to do? Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
3. The rational behavioral model and utility theory
a. Shogren, J. F. and L. O. Taylor (2008). On Behavioral-Environmental Economics Review of Environmental
Economics and Policy 2: 26-44.
b. Berns et al. The price of your soul: neural evidence for the non-utilitarian representation of sacred
values. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B March 5, 2012 367 (1589) 754-762.
c. McFadden D. Rationality for economists? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (1999) 19:73–105.
d. Ariely, Dan (2008). Are we in control of our own decisions? TEDTalks, available online.
e. Smith, V. Kerry (2010). Reflections on the Literature. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy
Advance 2, 292-308. {Does the literature on “happiness economics,” which uses people's answers to survey questions about their
happiness to address economic policy tradeoff provide a measure of respondents’ “true internal utility”?}
4. Public goods, market failure and externality theory
a. Institutional analysis and cooperative collective action (Ostrum)
i. Ostrom, E. (2009). A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Socio-Ecological Systems.
Science 325: 419–422.
ii. Ostrom, V. and E. Ostrom. (2003). Rethinking Institutional Analysis: Interviews with Vincent and
Elinor Ostrom. By Paul Dragos Aligica. Interview, Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
{Interview with Elinor Ostrum and her husband.}
iii. Video: http://mercatus.org/events/challenging-institutional-analysis-and-developmentbloomington-school
b. Classics
i. Pigou, Arthur C. (1920). The Economics of Welfare, London: Macmillan.
ii. Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science 162, 1243-48.
iii. Coase, Ronald H. (1960). The Problem of Social Cost. The Journal of Law and Economics 3, 1-44
(Chapter 3 in EESR). { Property rights and transactions costs.}
c. Dixit, A., and M. Olson. “Does Voluntary Participation Undermine the Coase Theorem?” Journal of Public
Economics 76 (2000): 309-335.
d. Fullerton, Don, “A Framework to Compare Environmental Policies,” Southern Economic Journal 68 (2),
October 2001, 224-48.
e. Egan, L. M., and M. J. Watts. “Incomplete Property Rights and Federal Grazing Permits.” Land Economics
74 (May 1998): 171-185.
5. Project evaluation: Cost-Benefit Analysis/Cost Effectiveness
a. General readings
i. Mechanics
1. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006) Cost-Benefit Analysis and the
Environment: Recent Developments, OECD, http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
a. Chp. 1 Introduction {History of and rationale for BCA.}
b. Chp. 2 The Foundations of Cost-Benefit Analysis
c. Chp. 3 The Stages of a Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis {See discussion of risk aversion in
appendix.}
ii. Kopp, R., Krupnick, A., Toman, M. (1997). Cost–benefit analysis and regulatory reform. Human
and Ecological Risk Assessment 3(5), 787–852. {summarizes the state of knowledge regarding CBA and offers
suggestions for improvement in its use}
iii.
Arrow, K. J., M. Cropper, G. C. Eads, R. W. Hahn, L. B. Lave, R. G. Noll, P. R. Portney, M. Russell,
R. Schmalensee, V. K. Smith, and R. N. Stavins (1996). "Is There a Role for Benefit-Cost Analysis
in Environmental, Health, and Safety Regulation?" Science 272, 221 – 222. [NOTE: This version
is a reprint from Environment and Development Economics 2 (1997): 196–201]. {Pragmatic defense
of CBA.}
iv. U.S. EPA (2010). Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses. National Center for Environmental
Economics, Office of Policy. (Self explanatory—details the EPAs approach to performing economic analyses of
environmental regulations and policies. Integrates requirements from Executive Orders, guidance from the OMB and EPAs expertise.)
v.
Farrow, Scott and Michael Toman. (1999). "Using Environmental Benefit-Cost Analysis to
Improve Government Performance," Environment 41, 12–37. {Describes the legal and administrative basis of
mandates that variously require and eschew economic measures for environmental management—congressional and executive.
Outlines steps in a BCA. Example for lead reduction in gasoline. Rebuts criticisims. How to lie with BCA. Table of good practices.
Note: link is to an earlier version of the paper with a slightly different title than what was published.}
vi. Sen, A. (2000), "The Discipline of Cost-Benefit Analysis", Journal of Legal Studies 29(2):931-952.
{Detailed discussion of the full set of conceptual assumptions needed for CBA. Concerning controversies, “(t)he main object of this
paper is not so much to decide who is right but to identify what the issues are.”}
b. Equity & distribution:
i. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006). Chp. 15: Equity and Cost-Benefit Analysis. CostBenefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments, OECD, http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
ii. Bento, Antonio, L Goulder, M Jacobsen and R Von-Haefen (2009). “Efficiency and Distributional
Impacts of Increased U.S. Gasoline Taxes”, American Economic Review 99 (3). {Examines efficiency and
distributional implications of a gasoline tax with an econometrically based multimarket simulation model.}
c. Discounting
i. Lawrence H. Goulder and Robert N. Stavins. “An eye on the future.” Nature 419, 673-674 (17
October 2002). {General scientific audience introduction to discounting in 2 pages.}
ii. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006) Chapter 13: “Discounting,” in Cost-Benefit Analysis
and the Environment: Recent Developments, OECD, http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
iii. EPA draft: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eermfile.nsf/vwAN/EE-0516-06.pdf/$File/EE-051606.pdf?OpenElement
iv. Weitzman, M.L., 2001. Gamma Discounting. American Economic Review 91(1), 260-271.
{Presents data from responses to what a large sample of economists state should be the
appropriate discount rate and emphasizes that there is no consensus on a single appropriate
discount rate.}
v. Larry Karp, “Global Warming and Hyperbolic Discounting,” JPubE, 89:262-82 (2005).
d. Valuation
i. General and basic theory
1. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006) Chapter 6: “Total Economic Value,” in CostBenefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments, OECD,
http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
2. ecosystemvaluation.org: http://www.ecosystemvaluation.org/uses.htm {Website that
includes an overview of the major valuation techniques with examples.}
3. J. Horowitz and K. McConnell. 2002. A review of WTP/WTA studies, Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management 44, pp. 426–447.
ii. Classic
1. John V. Krutilla, "Conservation Reconsidered," AER, 57:777-86 (1967).
iii. Stated preference/Direct elicitation methods/Nonmarket valuation
1. Bateman IJ, Carson RT, Day B, Hanemann WM, Hanley N, Hett T, Jones-Lee M, Loomes
G, Mourato S, Özdemiroglu E, Pearce DW, Sugden R and Swanson J (2002). Economic
valuation with stated preference techniques: a manual. Edward Elgar, Northamptonm,
MA.
a. A summary of the detail in Bateman et al. (2002) above for the U.K. Department
of Transport is freely available online:
Pearce DW, and E. Özdemiroglu (2002). Economic Valuation with Stated
Preference Techniques: Summary Guide, Department for Transport, Local
Government and the Regions, (March 6) www.communities.gov.uk.
2. Brown, T.C. (2003), “Introduction to Stated Preference Methods”, in: P.A. Champ, K.J.
Boyle, and T.C. Brown, eds., A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation (Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht).
3. Contingent Valuation
a. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006) Chapters 8: “Stated Preference
Approaches I: Contingent Valuation Method” in Cost-Benefit Analysis and the
Environment: Recent Developments, OECD, http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
b. Boyle, K.J. (2003), “Contingent Valuation in Practice”, in: P.A. Champ, K.J. Boyle,
and T.C. Brown, eds., A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation (Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht).
c. Paul Portney, “The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care,”
J. Econ. Perspectives, 8(4):3-17 (1994). {An overview of the debater about CV.}
d. Diamond, Peter A. and Jerry A. Hausman, "Contingent Valuation: Is Some
Number Better than No Number?", Journal of Economic Perspectives 8 (4), Fall
1994, 45-64. {Skeptical take on CV.}
e. Hanneman, M. (1994), "Valuing the Environment Through Contingent Value",
Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(4):19-43. {A defense of CV.}
f. Examples
i. Carson, Richard T., et al. (2003). Contingent Valuation and Lost Passive
Use: Damages from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Environmental and
Resource Economics 25, 257-86..
ii. Rubin et al. (1991) “A Benefit-Cost Analysis of the Northern Spotted
Owl,” Journal of Forestry.
4. Choice modelling
a. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006) Chapters 9: “Stated Preference
Approaches II: Choice Modelling” in Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment:
Recent Developments, OECD, http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
5. Cameron, T.A., G.L. Poe, R.G. Ethier, and W.D. Schulze (2002), "Alternative Non-market
Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same?" Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management 44(3):391-421. {Empirical application and
comparison of several forms of non-market valuation techniques. Includes a review of
comparison studies.}
iv. Indirect methods/Revealed Pref
1. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006) Chapter 7: “Revealed Preference Methods
for Valuing Non-market Impacts,” in Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent
Developments, OECD, http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
2. Hedonics
a. Taylor, L.O. (2003). “The Hedonic Method”. In: Champ, P.A., Boyle, K.J., Brown,
T.C. (Eds.), A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Dordrecht. {A survey of hedonic studies.}
b. Examples
i. Chay, Kenneth Y. and Michael Greenstone, "Does Air Quality Matter?
Evidence From the Housing Market," JPE, 90: 1257-1278 (2005).
ii. Schmidt and Courant (2006) “Sometimes Close is Good Enough: The
Value of Nearby Environmental Amenities,” Journal of Regional Science.
iii. Abdalla et al. (1992) “Valuing Environmental Quality Changes Using
Averting Expenditures: An Application to Ground Water Contamination,”
Land Economics.
iv. Teisl, M. F., B. Roe, and R. L. Hicks. “Can Eco-Labels Tune a Market?
Evidence from Dolphin-Safe Labeling.” Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management 43 (2002): 339-359.
c. VSL
i. Maureen Cropper, James K. Hammitt and Lisa A. Robinson (2011).
Valuing Mortality Risk Reductions: Progress and Challenges. Annual
Review of Resource Economics 3: 313-336.
ii. Cameron, T. (2010) "The Value of a Statistical Life: [They] do not think it
means what [we] think it means." Working paper (Forthcoming in
REEP?).
iii. Robinson, Lisa A. (2007). How US Government Agencies Value Mortality
Risk Reductions, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 1(2)
283:287.
iv. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006) Chapter 14: “Valuing
Health and Life Risks,” in Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment:
Recent Developments, OECD, http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
v. Viscusi, “The Value of Risks to Life and Health,” J. Econ. Lit., 31:1912-46
(1993)
3. Household production/increasing or decreasing exposure
a. Parsons, G.R. (2003). “The Travel Cost Model”. In: Champ, P.A., Boyle, K.J.,
Brown, T.C. (Eds.), A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht. {A survey of travel cost and random utility (recreational
choice) models.}
v. Valuation of Ecosystem services
1. Barbier, E.B. Valuing ecosystem services as productive inputs, Economic Policy 49
(2007), pp. 178–229. {Nice overview of valuation methods for ES including production function
approaches including a discussion of mangroves.}
2. A report from the EPA SAB on valuing the ecosystem services:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/WebBOARD/ValProtEcolSys%26Serv?Open
Document
3. Geoffrey Heal. A Celebration of Environmental and Resource Economics. Rev Environ
Econ Policy 2007 1: 7-25. [Full Text] [PDF]. {Useful recent overview of conservation and EcoSystServ lit.}
4. Ruhl, J. B., Salzman, James E. and Goodman, Iris , Implementing the New Ecosystem
Services Mandate of the Section 404 Compensatory Mitigation Program: A Catalyst for
Advancing Science and Policy (October 8, 2008). Stetson Law Review, Vol. 38, 2009.
5. Carpenter, S.R. et al. (2009). Science for managing ecosystem services: Beyond the
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
106(5) 1305.
6. National Research Council (2004). Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better
Environmental Decision-Making, Committee on Assessing and Valuing the Services of
Aquatic and Related Terrestrial Ecosystems, Washington, D.C., The National Academies
Press.
7. Sanchirico, J. and M. Springborn (2011). How to Get There From Here: Ecological and
Economic Dynamics of Ecosystem Service Provision. Environmental and Resource
Economics 48(2), 243-267. {Production function approach to ecosystem service valuation.}
vi. Other readings
1. Deacon and Kolstad: "Valuing Beach Recreation Lost in Environmental Accidents," J.
Water Res. Planning & Mgmt, 126: 374-81 (2000). {General discussion of methods and empirical
challenges, benefits transfer, CV and travel cost.}
vii. Benefits transfer
1. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006) Chapter 17: “Benefits Transfer,” in CostBenefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments, OECD,
http://puck.sourceoecd.org.
2. Kotchen et al. (2006) “Environmental Constraints on Hydropower: An Ex Post BenefitCost Analysis of Dam Relicensing in Michigan,” Land Economics.
viii. Non-Use Values
1. Arrow, K., R. Solow, P. Portney, E. Leamer, R. Radner, and H. Shuman, “Report of the
NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation,” Federal Register, US. Department of Commerce,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, FR 58 (1993), 4601-4614. {Blue
ribbon panel on CV motivated by Exxon Valdez disaster.}
2. Weitzman, M. L. “What to Preserve? An Application of Diversity Theory to Crane
Conservation,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 108 (February 1993): 157-183.
3. Metrick, A., and M. L. Weitzman, “Patterns of Behavior in Endangered Species
Preservation,” Land Economics 72 (February 1996): 1-16.
e. The costs of regulation
i. Jorgenson, Dale W. and Peter J. Wilcoxen, "Environmental Regulation and U.S. Economic
Growth," RAND Journal of Economics 21, Summer 1990, 314-40.
ii. Becker, R (2005). “Air pollution abatement costs under the Clean Air Act: Evidence from the
PACE survey.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 50(1).
f. Information/Risk and Uncertainty:
i. General
1. Pindyck, R. S. (2007). Uncertainty in Environmental Economics. Review of Environmental
Economics and Policy 1, 45-65.
2. National Research Council (2004). “Judgment, Uncertainty, and Valuation”, Chapter 6 in
Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making, Committee
on Assessing and Valuing the Services of Aquatic and Related Terrestrial Ecosystems,
2004, Washington, D.C., The National Academies Press. (Focus on sections "UNCERTAINTY" and
"DECISION-MAKING AND DECISION CRITERIA UNDER UNCERTAINTY" (pp. 216-227) and "SUMMARY: CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS" (pp. 232-235).)
3. Tversky and Kahneman, “Judgment Under Uncertainty” Science, vol. 185, pp 1124-31
(1974)
4. Postrel, “Would you Take the Bird in the Hand or a 75% chance of two in the bush?”,
NYT, Jan 26, 2006.
ii. Instruments under uncertainty (see instruments).
iii. Irreversibilities and option value
1. Risk and uncertainty: Quasi-option value in conservation OECD chapter
2. Anthony C. Fisher, "Investment under uncertainty and option value in environmental
economics," REE, 22:197-204 (2000).
3. Daniel A. Graham, "Cost-Benefit Analysis Under Uncertainty," AER, 71: 715-725 (1981).
4. Kenneth J. Arrow and Anthony C. Fisher, "Environmental Preservation, Uncertainty, and
Irreversibility," QJE, 88, 312-319 (1974)
5. Anthony C. Fisher and W. Michael Hanemann, "Quasi-option Value: Some
Misconceptions Dispelled," JEEM, 14:183-90 (1987).
iv. Adaptive management
1. Policy and regulatory process
a. Doremus, H. (2001). Adaptive Management, the Endangered Species Act, and
the Institutional Challenges of New Age Environmental Protection. Washburn LJ,
41, 50.
b. Doremus, H. (2007). Precaution, science, and learning while doing in natural
resource management. Wash. L. Rev., 82, 547.
c. Doremus, H. (2011). Adaptive management as an information problem. North
Carolina Law Review, 189, 101-141.
2. Natural resource management
a. Sethi, G., Costello, C., Fisher, A., Hanemann, M. & Karp, L. (2005). Fishery
management under multiple uncertainty. Journal of Environmental Economics
and Management, 50, 300-318.
b. Hartmann, K., Bode, L. & Armsworth, P. (2007). The economic optimality of
learning from marine protected areas. ANZIAM Journal, 48, C307-C329.
c. Martin, J., Fackler, P.L., Nichols, J.D., Runge, M.C., McIntyre, C.L., Lubow,
B.L., McCluskie, M.C. & Schmutz, J. A. (2011) An Adaptive-Management
Framework for Optimal Control of Hiking Near Golden Eagle Nests in Denali
National Park. Conservation Biology, 25(2): 316-323.
d. McCarthy, M. A., and H. P. Possingham. 2007. Active adaptive management
for conservation. Conservation Biology 21:956-963.
e. McDonald-Madden, Eve, William J. M. Probert, Cindy E. Hauser, Michael C.
Runge, Hugh Possingham, Menna E. Jones, Joslin L. Moore, Tracy Rout, Peter
A. Vesk, And Brendan A. Wintle 2010. “Active adaptive conservation of
threatened species in the face of uncertainty.” Ecological Applications,
20(5):1476–1489.
3. Pollution control
a. Kelly, D., C. Kolstad, and G. Mitchell (2005). Adjustment costs from
environmental change. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
50 (3), 468-495.
4. Foundational references
a. Holling, C. S. 1978. Adaptive environmental assessment and management.
Blackburn Press, Caldwell, NJ, USA.
b. Walters, C. J. 1986. Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources.
Blackburn Press, Caldwell, NJ, USA.
a. Walters, C., Hilborn, R., 1976. Adaptive control of fishing systems. Journal
of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 33:145–159.
g. CBA: Criticism, ethics and the political process
i. Political process
1. Fraas, A. and R. Lutter (2011). The Challenges of Improving the Economic Analysis of
Pending Regulations: The Experience of OMB Circular A-4. Annual Review of Resource
Economics 3, 71-85. (Reviews the quality of a key set of recent federal benefit-cost analyses for major
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules in the several years since OMB issued A-4, an update to guidelines on
conducting regulatory impact analyses)
2. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, Federal Register page 58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993. {Reading emphasis: introduction, Section 1 and Section 6. Clinton administration executive order
regarding use of CBA in assessing Federal regulations; kept in place (though amended) by administration of G.W. Bush; kept in place by
Obama administration which rescinded Bush amendments. For electronic text of EO’s see Executive Orders Disposition Tables.}
3. Judis, J. (2010). “The Quiet Revolution.” The New Republic (Feb. 1),
http://www.tnr.com. {Interesting partisan (liberal) take on the appointment of regulatory positions and the use of CBA in the
executive brandch (OIRA) during the Reagan through Obama administrations.}
4. Robert W. Hahn, The Impact of Economics on Environmental Policy, Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management, Volume 39, Issue 3, May 2000, Pages 375399. {Argues that economists and economic instruments have had a modest impact on shaping environmental, health, and safety
regulation, but that economists will play an increasingly important role. Discusses political economy of environmental regulation.}
5. Robert W. Hahn and Patrick M. Dudley (2007). How Well Does the U.S. Government Do
Benefit-Cost Analysis? Rev Environ Econ Policy 1, 192-211. {Explores the potential usefulness of
government benefit-cost analysis by examining how it is actually performed in the United States. Assesses the quality of
seventy-four analyses which span the Reagan administration, the George H. W. Bush administration, and the Clinton
administrations. Includes an overview of the history of BCA emphasis in the U.S. executive. E.g. EO 12866.}
6. van Houtven, G.L. and M.L. Cropper (1999). “When Is a Life Too Costly To Save? The
Evidence from Environmental Regulations” in W. Oates, ed., The RFF Reader in
Environmental and Resource Management, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
{Good reference for outlining how the EPA actually sets standards. The authors ask two questions: Whether allowed to or
not, has the EPA balanced costs and benefits in setting environmental standards? Where has the EPA drawn the line in
deciding how much to spend to save a statistical life?}
7. Section 2.2 in: Revesz RL, Stavins RN (2007) Environmental law. In: Mitchell Polinsky A,
Shavell S (eds) Handbook of law and economics. Elsevier Science, Amesterdam, pp 499589.
8. Averill, Merilyn (2003). Arsenic in Drinking Water, Kennedy School of Government at
Harvard University case study, available on-line (for $3.95) at:
http://www.ksgcase.harvard.edu/casetitle.asp?caseNo=1680.0
ii. Criticism
1. Gowdy, J. (2004). The Revolution in Welfare Economics and its Implications for
Environmental Valuation and Policy. Land Economics 80:2, 239-257. {Provocative
critique of BCA, specifically neoclassical welfare economics.}
2. Kelman, Steven, “Cost-Benefit Analysis: An Ethical Critique,” AEI Journal on Government
and Society Regulation, Jan/Feb. 1981, 33-40 (Chapter 14 in EESR).
3. Adler, M.D. and E.A. Posner, eds. (2001), Cost-Benefit Analysis: Legal, Economic and
Philosophical Perspectives (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL). {Collection of critiques and
responses.}
4. Ackerman, F. & Heinzerling, L. (2004) Priceless: On knowing the price of everything and
the value of nothing. The New Press. {Book, highly critical of the role of CBA in policy at the federal level.
Appeals to a precautionary principle approach.}
a. Sunstein, Cass. "Your Money or Your Life." The New Republic 230, no. 9 (2004):
27-30. (Review of Ackerman and Heinzerling's Priceless: On Knowing the Price of Everything and the Value of Nothing.
Nice overview of the common criticisms of BCA that appear in A&H. Acknowledges issues raised but characterizes appeal to
PP approach as “worse than unhelpful” and “utterly incoherent” in many contexts. Criticizes A&H’s view of regulators role as
stopping evildoers when most environmental questions “nvolve complex questions about how to control risks that stem both
from nature and from mostly beneficial products”.)
h. Examples
i. Robert Stavins, Environmental Defense Fund, “The Tuolumne River: Preservation or
Development?” (March 1984).
ii. Kotchen and Burger. Oil and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Resources for the Future.
Weekly Policy Commentary #51. 2008.
iii. Ando et al., “Species Distributions, Land Values and Efficient Conservation,” Science, 279: 21268 (27 March 1998).
iv. Interdisciplinary Application of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
1. Stephen C. Newbold, Juha Siikamäki (2009) “Prioritizing conservation activities using
reserve site selection methods and population viability analysis.” Ecological
Applications: Vol. 19, No. 7, pp. 1774-1790.
2. Halsing and Moore (forthcoming) “Cost-Effective Recovery Strategies for Snake River
Chinook Salmon: A Biological-Economic Synthesis” Conservation Biology.
6. Policy and instrument choice
a. Overal Issues
i. Role of government
1. Portney, Paul R. and Robert N. Stavins, “Introduction,” and Portney, Paul R., “EPA and
the Evolution of Federal Regulation,” Chapters 1&2 in Portney and Stavins, eds., Public
Policies for Environmental Protection, Washington, DC: RFF (2000). (This paper details
the practical world of environmental policy-making as it has evolved in the USA from the
early 1970s to the present day.)
2. Sterner, T., 2003. “National Policy and Planning.” Chapter 11 in Policy Instruments of
Environmental and Natural Resource Management. Resources for the Future,
Washington, DC.
ii. Goulder, L. H. and I. W. H. Parry (2008). Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy
Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 2: 152-174. {First, no single instrument is clearly superior along all the dimensions relevant to
policy choice; even the ranking along a single dimension often depends on the circumstances involved. Second, significant trade-offs arise in the choice of instrument: for example, assuring a reasonable degree of
distributional equity will often require a sacrifice of cost-effectiveness. Third, it is sometimes desirable to design hybrid instruments that combine features of various "pure" instruments. Fourth, for many pollution
problems, more than one market failure may be involved, which may justify (on efficiency grounds, at least) employing more than one instrument. Finally, potential interactions among environmental policy
instruments and among regulatory jurisdictions need to be carefully considered.}
iii. Freeman, A. Myrick, "Environmental Policy Since Earth Day I: What Have We Gained?, Journal of
Economic Perspectives 16(1), Winter 2002, 125-46 (Ch. 30 in EESR).
iv. Efficiency versus equity
1. EPA on distribution and equity (DRAFT):
http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eermfile.nsf/vwAN/EE-0516-09.pdf/$File/EE-051609.pdf?OpenElement
v. Politics and psychology
1. Sterner, T., 2003. “Politics and Psychology of Policy Instruments.” Chapter 16 in Policy
Instruments of Environmental and Natural Resource Management. Resources for the
Future, Washington, DC, 193-202.
vi. Instruments under uncertainty
1. Perman, Roger et al, “The Relative Merits of Pollution Control Instruments under
Conditions of Uncertainty,” section 8.3 of Natural Resource and Environmental
Economics , Pearson Addison Wesley, 2003, pp. 251-7.
2. Weitzman, Martin L., "Prices vs. Quantities," Review of Economic Studies 41 (4), October
1974, 477-91.
3. Weitzman, M. L. “Landing Fees vs. Harvest Quotas with Uncertain Fish Stocks.” Journal
of Environmental Economics and Management 43 (2002): 325-338.
vii. Innovation
1. Montero, J.-P. “Permits, Standards, and Technology Innovation.” Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management 44 (2002): 23-44.
viii. Second best setting
1. Goulder, L. H., I. W. H. Parry, R. C. Williams III, and D. Burtraw. “The Cost-Effectiveness
of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting.”
Journal of Public Economics 72 (1999): 329-360.
b. Market-based instruments
i. General
1. Stavins, Robert N., “Market-Based Environmental Policies,” Chapter 3 in Portney and
Stavins, eds., Public Policies for Environmental Protection, Second Edition, Washington,
DC: Resources for the Future (2000).
ii. Criticism
1. Sandel, M.J. (1997). “It’s Immoral to Buy the Right To Pollute,” New York Times, Dec. 15,
p. A29.
2. Frey, B. S. and R. Jegen (2001). "Motivation Crowding Theory." Journal of Economic
Surveys 15(5) 589-611.
iii. Prices
1. Payments for Ecosytem Sevices (PES)
a. Salzman, James E., A Policy Maker's Guide to Designing Payments for Ecosystem
Services (November 2, 2009). Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1498629.
b. Armsworth, P.R., Acs, S., Dallimer, M., Gaston, K.J., Hanley, N. & Wilson, P.
(2012). The cost of policy simplification in conservation incentive programs.
Ecology Letters 15(5), 406-414.
c. Daily, G.C. & Matson, P.A. (2008). Ecosystem services: From theory to
implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 9455.
d. Boyd J and Banzhaf S. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for
standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 63:616-626.
iv. Cap and trade
1. Pollution permits
a. Burtraw, Dallas, “Trading Emissions To Clean the Air: Exchanges Few but Savings
Many,” in W. Oates, ed., The RFF Reader in Environmental and Resource
Management, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 1999.
2. Transferrable development rights
a. McConnell, V. and M. Walls (2009). Policy Monitor: U.S. Experience with
Transferable Development Rights. Review of Environmental Economics and
Policy 3: 288-303.
2. Tradeable quotas
a. Heal and Schlenker. Sustainable Fisheries. Nature. 2008
3. SO2 case study:
a. Arimura, T. H. “An Empirical Study of the SO2 Allowance Market: Effects of PUC
Regulations.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44 (2002):
271-289.
b. Joskow, P. L., R. Schmalensee, and E. M. Bailey, “The Market for Sulfur Dioxide
Emissions,” American Economic Review 88 (September 1998): 669-685.
b. Controlling Nonpoint Source Pollutants
i. Griffin, R.C., and D.W. Bromley, “Agricultural Runoff as a Nonpoint Externality: A Theoretical
Development,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 64 (1982): 547-552.
ii. Stevens, B.K., “Fiscal Implications of Effluent Charges and Input Taxes,” Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management 15(1988): 285-296
iii. Segerson, K., “Uncertainty and Incentives for Nonpoint Pollution Control,” Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management 15(1988): 87-98.
iv. Lichtenberg, E., D. Zilberman, and K.T. Bogen, “Regulating Environmental Health Risks Under
Uncertainty: Groundwater Contamination in California,” Journal of Environmental Economics
and Management 16(1989):22-34.
v. Segerson, K., “Uncertainty and Incentives for Nonpoint Pollution Control,” Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management 15(1988):87-98
vi. Feather, P. M., and J. Cooper. Voluntary Incentives for Reducing Agricultural Nonpoint Source
Water Pollution. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service,
Agriculture Information Bulletin Number 716, May 1995
vii. Larson, D. M., G. E. Helfand, and B. W. House, “Second-Best Tax Policies to Reduce Nonpoint
Source Pollution,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78 (November 1996):1108-1117. {
A cost-effectiveness approach to determining the best single-input tax policy is developed and
applied to the question of reducing nitrate leaching from lettuce production in California.}
viii. Marc O. Ribaudo, Richard D. Horan, and Mark E. Smith. Economics of Water Quality Protection
From Nonpoint Sources: Theory and Practice. Resource Economics Division, Economic Research
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Economic Report No. 782, November 1999.
{Outlines the economic characteristics of five instruments that can be used to reduce
agricultural nonpoint source pollution (economic incentives, standards, education, liability, and
research) and discusses empirical research related to the use of these instruments.}
a. Risk regulation
c. Viscusi, W. K. (2007) Regulation of health, safety and environmental risks. In: Mitchell Polinsky A,
Shavell S (eds) Handbook of law and economics. Elsevier Science, Amesterdam, pp 591-645.{Provides a
systematic review of the economic analysis of health, safety, and environmental regulations.}
7. Topics/Applications
a. Sustainability/Growth and the environment
i. Kenneth J. Arrow, Partha Dasgupta, Lawrence H. Goulder, Kevin J. Mumford and Kirsten Oleson
(2012). Sustainability and the measurement of wealth. Environment and Development
Economics, 17, pp 317-353.
ii. Heal, G. (2012). Reflections--Defining and Measuring Sustainability. Rev Environ Econ Policy
6(1): 147-163. (Non-technical overview focusing on measurement issues and tradeoffs. Heal favors development
of the adjusted net savings (ANS) metric as an indicator of how wellbeing is changing over time.)
iii.
Dasgupta, P. (2007). Nature and the economy. Journal of Applied Ecology 44, 475–487.{Relatively
non-technical discussion of natural capital, externalities, sustainable development, and economic growth. Text of the
BES Lecture delivered at the annual conference of the British Ecological Society, 2006. Results taken from Arrow et al.
(2004), below.}
1. Arrow, K., P. Dasgupta, L. Goulder, G. Daily, P. Ehrlich, G. Heal, S. Levin, K. Maler, S.
Schneider, D. Starrett and B. Walker (2004). “Are We Consuming Too Much?”, Journal of
Economic Perspectives 18, 147-72. {Ecologists and economists on optimal consumption. Referred to
and updated in Dasgupta (2007) above.}
iv. K.J. Arrow, P. Dasgupta, L.H. Goulder, K.J. Mumford, and K. Oleson (2010). Sustainable
Development and the Measurement of Wealth, NBER Discussion Paper. Under review. {Technical
framework for sustainability metrics.}
v. K.J. Arrow, L.H. Goulder, K.J. Mumford, and K. Oleson (2010). China, the U.S., and Sustainability:
Perspectives Based on Comprehensive Wealth in Geoffrey Heal, ed., Is Economic Growth
Sustainable? Palgrave Macmillan. {See results tables at end.}
vi. Solow, R.M. (1993). "Sustainability: An Economist's Perspective," In Economics of the
Environment, eds. R. Dorfman and N. Dorfman. New York: Norton. {Lecture to the Marine Policy
Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA, June 14 1991. “…sustainability is a vague concept,
and it would be wrong to think about it as being precise, or even capable of being made precise. It is therefore
probably not in any way a clear way an exact guide to policy. Nevertheless, it is not at all useless” (p. 180).}
vii. Stavins, R., A. Wagner, G. Wagner (2003). Interpreting Sustainability in Economic Terms:
Dynamic Efficiency Plus Intergenerational Equity, Economic Letters 79, 339-343. {Economists have
confined the concept of ‘sustainability’ to intertemporal distributional equity. We propose a broader definition,
combining dynamic efficiency and intergenerational equity, and relate it to two concepts from neoclassical economics:
potential Pareto-improvements and inter-personal compensation.}
viii. Kuznets Curve/limits to growth
1. Richard T. Carson. (2010) The Environmental Kuznets Curve: Seeking Empirical
Regularity and Theoretical Structure. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 4:
3-23.
2. Dasgupta, Susmita, et al, "Confronting the Environmental Kuznets Curve,", Journal of
Economic Perspectives 16(1), Winter 2002, 147-68. (Connection with poverty and
environment.)
3. Brock, W.A. & Taylor, M.S. (2005). Economic growth and the environment: a review of
theory and empirics. Handbook of economic growth 1, 1749-1821.
ix. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006). “Sustainability and Benefit-Cost Analysis,”
Chapter 16 in Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments, OECD,
http://puck.sourceoecd.org. [The notions of sustainability and "sustainable development" have
permeated significant parts of policy and public discourse about the environment. This chapter
discusses the handful of recommendations do exist with regards to how CBA can be extended to
take account of these concerns.]
x. Arrow, K. and Bolin, B. and Costanza, R. and Dasgupta, P. and Folke, C. and Holling, C.S. and
Jansson, B.O. and Levin, S. and Maler, K.G. and Perrings, C. and others (1996). Economic growth,
carrying capacity, and the environment. Ecological Applications 6(1), 13—15.
xi. Pezzey, J.C.V., Toman, M.A. (2001). “Progress and problems in the economics of sustainability”.
In: Tietenberg, T.H., Folmer, H. (Eds.), International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource
Economics 2002/2003. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
xii. Pezzey, J.C.V., Toman, M.A. (2002). “The Economics of Sustainability: A Review of Journal
Articles”. Discussion Paper 02-03, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.
xiii. Hansen, J.W. (1996). “Is agricultural sustainability a useful concept?” Agriculture, Ecosystems
and Environment 50, 117–143. {This paper examines conceptual and methodological barriers to using
sustainability as a criterion for guiding change in agriculture and proposes elements necessary for approaches to
characterizing sustainability to be generally useful. …Although interpreting sustainability as a system property is
logically more consistent, conceptual and practical problems with its characterization have limited its usefulness as a
criterion for guiding change. }
xiv. The Economist (2002). “Sustaining the poor’s development.” August 31st, p. 11.
b. Corporate Social Responsibility
i. Forest L. Reinhardt, Robert N. Stavins, and Richard H. K. Vietor. Corporate Social Responsibility
Through an Economic Lens. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy Advance Access
published on July 11, 2008. Rev Environ Econ Policy 2008 2: 219-239.[Full Text] [PDF] [And two
others in the same issue…]
c. Economics of Biodiversity, endangered species, critical habitat, conservation
i. General/overview
1. Polasky, S., C. Costello and A. Solow (2005). “The Economics of Biodiversity”, Chapter 29
in: Karl-Goran Maler and Jeffrey R. Vincent, Editor(s), Handbook of Environmental
Economics, Elsevier, 2005, Volume 3, 1517-1560.
2. Perrings, C., S. Baumgärtner, W.A. Brock, K. Chopra, M. Conte, C. Costello, A.
Duraiappah, A.P. Kinzig, U. Pascual, S. Polasky and others. 2009. The economics of
biodiversity and ecosystem services. Chapter 17 in: Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning,
and Human Wellbeing: An Ecological and Economic Perspective, Oxford University Press,
230-247.
ii. Setting the goal/optimal biodiversity protection
1. Metrick, A. and M. L. Weitzman (1998). “Conflicts and Choices in Biodiversity
Preservation,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 12 (3), 21-34.
iii. Reserve site selection
1. Newbold, S. C. and J. Siikamäki (2009). “Prioritizing conservation activities using reserve
site selection methods and population viability analysis.” Ecological Applications 19(7)
1774-1790.
iv. Policies and instruments
1. ESA
a. Brown, G., and J. Shogren (1998) “The Economics of the Endangered Species
Act,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 12(3), 3-20.
v. Program evaluation
1. Ferraro and Simpson: “Cost-Effective Conservation”, Resources #143 (2001). {“A Review
of What Works to Preserve Biodiversity.”}
vi. Valuation (see also “Valuation of ecosystem services” section)
1. Bioprospecting
a. Rausser, G., and A. Small. “Valuing Research Leads: BioProspecting and the
Conservation of Genetic Resources.” Journal of Political Economy 108 (Feb.
2000): 173-206.
b. Simpson, R. D., R. A. Sedjo, and J. W. Reid. “Valuing Biodiversity for Use in
Pharmaceutical Research.” Journal of Political Economy 104 (1996): 163-185.
c. Pearce, D., G. Atkinson and S. Mourato (2006). Chapter 12: “The Value of
Ecosystem Services” in Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent
Developments, OECD, http://puck.sourceoecd.org. {Summarizes Simpson et al. (1996),
Craft and Simpson (2001), Rausser and Small (2000) and Costello and Ward (2006).}
d. Costello, C. & Ward, M. (2006). Search, bioprospecting and biodiversity
conservation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 52, 615–626. {Simpson et al. [28] argue that
bioprospecting incentives are likely vanishingly small, less than $21/ha. In contrast, Rausser and Small [26]
argue that bioprospecting incentives are likely quite large, perhaps $9177/ha. This paper identifies what drives
the discrepancy and resolves poor arguments in earlier literature.}
2. Ecotourism
vii. Implementation
1. OECD (2004). “Handbook of Market Creation for Biodiversity: Issues in Implementation.”
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, i-177.
viii. Further reading: see Daniel Kramer’s course website for an extensive organized list of readings
in the “Socio-economics and Policy of Conservation Biology”
d. Climate change
i. See REEP: Symposium: The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review and Its Critics,
Winter 2008 (and in f/u issues)
ii. Integrated assessment modeling
1. Nordhaus, W.D. (2008). A question of balance: Weighing the options on global warming
policies. Yale Univ Press. {A book detailing in relatively plain language how Nordhaus’s
DICE/RICE modeling approach works.}
2. Nordhaus, W. "Economic aspects of global warming in a post-Copenhagen
environment," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (US), June 2010, click
here. (Application of the RICE model, for the Appendix with technical details, click here.)
3. "Summary of Conclusions" excerpt (pp. vi - ix) from the Stern Review:
Stern, N., Peters, S., Bakhshi, V., Bowen, A., Cameron, C., Catovsky, S., Crane, D.,
Cruickshank, S., Dietz, S., Edmonson, N., Garbett, S.-L., Hamid, L., Hoffman, G., Ingram,
D., Jones, B., Patmore, N., Radcliffe, H., Sathiyarajah, R., Stock, M., Taylor, C., Vernon, T.,
Wanjie, H., & Zenghelis, D. (2006). Stern review: the economics of climate change.
London: HM Treasury.
4. Excerpt from: Dyson, Freeman. 2008. The question of global warming. The New York
Review of Books 55(10), June 12, 2008. [A review of a book written by Nordhaus and provides an
accessible introduction to the DICE integrated assessment model (IAM).]
5. Excerpt from: Nordhaus, W., L. Sullivan and D. Zenghelis (2008). `The question of global
warming’: An exchange. The New York Review of Books 55(10), September 25, 2008.
6. Nordhaus, W. (2007). “Critical assumptions in the Stern Review on climate change.”
Science 317, 201–202.
7. Dasgupta, P. (2008). Discounting climate change. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 37,
141-169.
iii. International climate agreements
1. Aldy, Joseph E. and Robert N. Stavins. "Designing the Next International Climate
Agreement." RFF Weekly Policy Commentary (September 24, 2007). [Discusses the
strengths and weaknesses of the Kyoto Protocol and advice for future international
agreements.]
iv. U.S. perspective
1. William A. Pizer (2007). "A U.S. Perspective on Future Climate Regimes," Resources for
the Future Discussion Paper 07-04.
2. EPA regulation of GHGs
a.
Nathan Richardson, Art Fraas, and Dallas Burtraw (2010). “Greenhouse Gas
Regulation under the Clean Air Act: Structure, Effects, and Implications of a
Knowable Pathway.” RFF Discussion Paper 10-23, April. {Analysis of the mechanisms
available to the EPA for regulating GHGs from industrial and power facilities; identifies New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) as the most predictable, likely, and practical pathway.}
3. Cap and trade criticism
a. Hansen, J (2009). “Cap and Fade.” New York Times (Dec. 6),
http://www.nytimes.com.
v. California/AB32
1. Hanemann, M. (2008) “California's New Greenhouse Gas Laws.” Review of
Environmental Economics and Policy 2: 114-129.
vi. Offsets
1.
Schapiro, Mark (2010). Conning the climate: Inside the carbon-trading shell game.
Harper’s Magazine, February, 31-39. {Via MR: “a good piece…on how the market works. …the measurement
infrastructure that has been created is actually quite impressive, but not enough effort has been put into monitoring.” “In this highly
specialized new industry, perhaps a thousand people really understand how onsite measurement of CDM projects works, and there is a
serious potential for conflicts of interest.”}
vii. Uncertainty
1. Weitzman, M (2009). “On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic
climate change.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 91(1), 1-19.
2. Weitzman, M (2011). Fat-tailed uncertainty in the economics of catastrophic climate
change. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 5(2) 275—292.
3. Costello, C., M. Neubert, S Polasky and A Solow (2010). “Bounded uncertainty and
climate change economics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(18)
8108-8110.
4. Kousky C. and R. M. Cooke (2009). “Climate Change and Risk Management: Challenges
for Insurance, Adaptation, and Loss Estimation.” RFF discussion paper, DP 09-03-REV.
e. Invasive Species
i. Olson, L. (2006). “The Economics of Terrestrial Invasive Species: A Review of the Literature.”
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 35 (1).
ii. D Pimentel, L Lach, R Zuniga, D Morrison. 2000. “Environmental and economic costs of
nonindigenous species in the United States.” BioScience, Univ California Press. { The original
Pimentel valuation paper which synthesizes information from many valuation studies, since
updated in 2005.}
iii. Perrings, C., H. Mooney and M. Williamson. 2010. “The Problem of Biological Invasions.”
Chapter 1 in Bioinvasions and Globalization: Ecology, Economics, Management, and Policy. C.
Perrings, H. Mooney and M. Williamson, Ed. Oxford University Press.
a. Water
d. Water quality
i. Sheila M. Olmstead “The Economics of Water Quality. Review of Environmental Economics and
Policy Advance Access published on November 12, 2009. Rev Environ Econ Policy 2010 4: 44-62.
[Full Text] [PDF]
e. Air quality
i. Bryan J. Hubbell, Richard V. Crume, Dale M. Evarts, and Jeff M. Cohen. Policy Monitor:
Regulation and Progress under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Review of Environmental
Economics and Policy Advance Access published on December 22, 2009. Rev Environ Econ
Policy 2010 4: 122-138. [Full Text] [PDF]
f. Energy
i. Renewable energy
1. Geoffrey Heal. “Reflections—The Economics of Renewable Energy in the United States.”
Review of Environmental Economics and Policy Advance Access published on December
14, 2009 . Rev Environ Econ Policy 2010 4: 139-154. [Full Text] [PDF]
ii. Energy efficiency policy
1. Tom Tietenberg. “Reflections—Energy Efficiency Policy: Pipe Dream or Pipeline to the
Future?” Rev Environ Econ Policy 2009 3: 304-320. [Full Text] [PDF]
g. Political Economy
i. Keohane, Nathaniel O., Richard L. Revesz, and Robert N. Stavins, “The Choice of Regulatory
Instrument in Environmental Policy,” Harvard Environmental Law Review 22, 1998, 313-67.
ii. Maloney, Michael T. and Robert E. McCormick, "A Positive Theory of Environmental Quality
Regulation", Journal of Law & Economics 25, April 1982, 99-123.
h. Poverty and the Environment
i. Cooper, Richard N., Environment and Resource Policies for the World Economy, Washington,
DC: The Brookings Institution, 1994.
ii. Dasgupta, Susmita, et al, "Confronting the Environmental Kuznets Curve,", Journal of Economic
Perspectives 16(1), Winter 2002, 147-68.
i. Developing countries
i. Special Policy Forum (1997) “Benefit-Cost Analysis and the Environment in Developing
Countries,” Environment and Development Economics, 2, 195-221.
8. General criticism of economics
a. McCloskey, Deirdre N. (2002) The Secret Sins of Economics. Chicago, IL: Prickly Paradigm Press.
i. Rebuttal: Hoover, Kevin and Mark Siegler. 2008. “Sound and Fury: McCloskey and Significance
Testing in Economics.” Journal of Economic Methodology. 15(1):1-37.
This list benefited from other related reading lists including: Don Fullerton (Univ. of Illionois at Urbana-Champaign), Matt
Kotchen (UCSB), Charlie Kolstad (UCSB), Christopher Costello (UCSB) and Doug Larson (UCD)
(2) Stavins, Robert N., ed., Economics of the Environment: Selected Readings, Fifth Edition, New York: W. W. Norton
and Company, 2005. (Cited below as EESR.)
(3) Portney, Paul R. and Robert N. Stavins, eds., Public Policies for Environmental Protection, Second Edition,
Washington DC: Resources for the Future, 2000.